New study examines aldermanic prerogative and how it can damage efforts to create affordable housing

John J. Kim / Chicago Tribune

People walk across the street from a parking lot in Edison Park neighborhood on July 3, 2018. A proposal to build a residential development there including low-income tenants was struck down.

People walk across the street from a parking lot in Edison Park neighborhood on July 3, 2018. A proposal to build a residential development there including low-income tenants was struck down. (John J. Kim / Chicago Tribune)

As far back as the 1930s, Chicago aldermen used their ability to decide zoning and land use in their wards to create and maintain communities segregated by race and class, according to a new report.

Some80 years later, elected officials continue to lean on both their informal and documented powers to block affordable housing in affluent white communities and keep lower-income black and Latino residents confined to certain parts of the city, the report says.

Not only is the city possibly violating civil rights laws by allowing aldermen to block affordable housing efforts, it’s missing out on the opportunity to thoughtfully integrate and plan a model city, said Kate Walz, the director of housing justice at the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law.

“The power given to aldermen to block affordable housing, either on their own or as a result of the demands of their constituents, results in serious civil rights issues for the city,” Walz said.

“What struck me is looking at the history, maybe the language has changed — we’ve softened it a bit — but the practice is the same,” Walz said.

This week, the Chicago Area Fair Housing Alliance will release its report titled, “A City Fragmented,” which looks into the way aldermanic prerogatives and privileges continue the cycle of segregated housing in Chicago. According to the report, aldermen single-handedly control development in their wards by determining zoning and by influencing which developments will get city funding and other forms of support.

Much of the City Council’s power over development is unwritten and informal.

Typically, if a development in a ward needs a zoning change or permit, and the development is not supported by the alderman of that ward, the proposal is voted down if it ever reaches the full City Council. In some cases, a developer can make a proposal, and the presiding alderman or zoning advisory council will dictate changes — such as how many of the apartments will be condominiums and how many should be set aside for lower-income residents. Those negotiations have to be navigated before the proposal can reach the City Council. The development proposal can also linger in the zoning committee, which is another way it eventually dies from inaction.

That power, known as aldermanic prerogative, is highly valued because it allows City Council members to shape the makeup of their wards and respond to their constituents’ wishes.

But it has meant that in many North Side wards, there is virtually no housing set aside for lower-income residents. And conversely, parts of the South and West sides have a glut of housing for lower-income, working families — but struggle to get housing that would attract middle class families. That has continued the clusters of residential poverty throughout the city, the report alleges.

Residents who don’t earn high incomes never get access to the better funded schools, job opportunities, transportation and amenities that are often concentrated in majority white, higher-income neighborhoods.

“This is an open secret, and I think we all generally know that there is an impediment to the creation and preservation of affordable housing,” said Jawanza Malone, an activist and organizer with the Kenwood-Oakland Community Organization, which has been pressing for a rent control measure to keep working residents living in the city. “People want to think, ‘this segregation is just how it is.’ But our elected officials have a hand in what happens in this city and who lives where.”

The study’s authors examined how zoning laws were used to keep low-income public housing residents confined to certain communities and how private market rate housing has been engineered to confine lower-income residents to specific neighborhoods. They also reviewed case by case what happened with most recent efforts to create affordable housing across Chicago.

John J. Kim / Chicago Tribune

People walk past businesses in the Edison Park neighborhood on July 3, 2018. A 2016 plan to build a housing complex across the street failed after a struggle over its affordable housing units.

People walk past businesses in the Edison Park neighborhood on July 3, 2018. A 2016 plan to build a housing complex across the street failed after a struggle over its affordable housing units. (John J. Kim / Chicago Tribune)

For example, in 2016, the developer Troy Realty proposed building a 44-unit complex of rental units at 6655 N. Oliphant Ave. in Edison Park. Because of city regulations, the developer would have had to set aside four units for lower-income residents. But once homeowners began to criticize the development to their alderman, saying they wanted owners, not renters in their community, the proposal was adjusted. Even after the developer agreed to reduce the number of units to 30, and to sell most of the apartments as condos at market rate, the project still did not win support. Eventually, it was killed because even with modifications, the zoning advisory council convinced the alderman not to allow the project to move forward.

Most recently, a Tribune investigation revealed that the number of affordable residences being built is below City Hall projections and the fees paid by developers to pay for affordable housing have been steered away from gentrifying neighborhoods.

The report is mainly critical of the aldermen’s power, but Ald. Walter Burnett Jr., 27th, said he could point to several cases where his colleagues used prerogative to approve housing even if it was unpopular in their wards. In his ward, he has supported the construction of single residency occupancy buildings that benefit lower income residents — not because his ward is desperate for development, but because his constituents need that housing option.

“I’ve had black South Siders who say they don’t want low-income residents in their neighborhoods; they want market-rate housing,” he said. “I know we can all live together. There are fears and ignorance. This issue isn’t just a North Side thing; it’s a city of Chicago thing.”

Trying to take power away from aldermen will be unpopular, Burnett said. It’s not a move he favors or supports because it’s that very privilege that aldermen can use to force the development of affordable housing.

“Allowing the aldermen to have some kind of prerogative in their community gives us an opportunity to speak for the people we represent,” he said. “There should be policy for affordable housing … so everyone is treated the same.”

In Ald. James Cappleman’s (46th) North Side ward, there is an abundance of low-income housing and homeless shelters, he points out. But in neighboring communities, that’s not the case.

“Aldermen are doing what their constituents want,” he said. “The problem is many of the constituents don’t want affordable housing. … We need a process that would take the aldermen out of it.”

On-site affordable housing in newly developed complexes is strictly for residents who earn 60 percent of the average median income, which is about $40,620 for a two-person household. But there is a need for housing, evenly spread throughout the city, for the many residents who earn much less than that and are either homeless or close to becoming homeless, Cappleman pointed out.

The report suggests that in order to ensure affordable housing, the city has to take steps to change the way business is conducted and develop a citywide protocol. That plan would have to force each ward to bear some of the weight of producing affordable housing.

“We’ve normalized segregation, and we’ve assumed that people live where they live because that’s where they want to live,” Walz said.

“When you explain to others how affordable housing is built here, they are left scratching their heads about why aldermen are left with this much control,” she said.

Monica Dillon has lived in Jefferson Park for 31 years as the owner of her single-family home. There is no affordable housing in her community. After a proposal that could have brought 30 apartments for lower-income residents to her community was defeated, she has become an activist pushing for affordable housing in communities without it.

“We live in a community with well-functioning schools, beautiful parks, plenty of transportation options, and it would help people to get to work — especially if they work at O’Hare (International Airport),” she said. “I feel we should be sharing what we have with people from all income levels.”

Now Dillon sees it as her mission to talk with her neighbors to try to dispel the myths and challenge the stereotypes surrounding affordable housing and even federally subsidized and public housing. Low income does not mean bad neighbor, she emphasizes.

“If you lose your job, you should be able to live in your neighborhood. If you become elderly and disabled, you should be able to live in your neighborhood. Every neighborhood should have varying housing to accommodate a lifespan,” she said.